Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:27:22.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TTIP negotiations, policy convergence, and the transatlantic digital economy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2017

Gaël Le Roux
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has the potential to be a landmark treaty on many grounds. According to European and American officials, one of the main features that should differentiate the TTIP from other bilateral free trade agreements is, beyond its unprecedented scale, the ambition of its regulatory dimension. On both sides of the Atlantic there is a strong incentive to mitigate the impacts of “behind-the-border” obstacles that mostly stem from existing divergences between laws and regulations applied in Europe and in the United States. To do this, trade negotiators, together with policymakers and regulators, attempt, when possible and desirable, to facilitate the convergence of the policies that frame the European and the American markets. This paper analyzes how convergence may be reached with regards to the regulation of the digital economy, a relatively new area of interest in the field of trade law and policy studies, that seems to deserve a specific attention considering the growing importance it has taken at the domestic level and in the context of trade negotiations.

Keywords

TTIPdigital economypolicy convergencedigital trade
Type
Research Article
Information
Business and Politics , Volume 19 , Special Issue 4: The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) , December 2017 , pp. 709 - 737
Copyright
Copyright © V.K. Aggarwal 2017 and published under exclusive license to Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akhtar, Shayerah Ilias and Jones, Vivian C.. 2014. “ Proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: In Brief .” Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research service.Google Scholar
Burri, Mira. 2007. “The Law of the World Trade Organization and the Communications Law of the European Community: On a Path of Harmony or Discord?” Journal of World Trade 41(4): 833–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burri, Mira. 2015. “The International Economic Law Framework for Digital Trade.” Zeitschrift für Schweizerisches Recht 135(2): 10–72.Google Scholar
CETA. 2016. Comprehensive economic and trade agreement, between Canada, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member State, of the other part. (Accessed 30 August 2017) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154329.pdf.Google Scholar
Council of the European Union. 2016. Decision on the signing on behalf of the European Union of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member States, of the other part, 2016/0206 (NLE) 10972/1/16 REV 1.Google Scholar
Court of Justice of the European Union. 2015. “Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner,” C-362/14.Google Scholar
Department of Commerce. 2013. “Internet Policy Task Force Green paper on Copyright policy, creativity and innovation in the digital economy.” (Accessed 30 August 2017) https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/news/publications/copyrightgreenpaper.pdf.Google Scholar
Damro, Chad. 2012. “Market Power Europe.” Journal of European Public Policy 19(5): 682–99.Google Scholar
DigitalEurope and Information Technology Industry Council. 2015. “Forging a truly transatlantic digital economy.” By Dean Garfield and John Higgins. (Accessed 10 October 2015) http://www.euractiv.com/sections/infosociety/forging-truly-transatlantic-digital-economy-316453.Google Scholar
Digital Millennium Copyright Act. 1998. An act to amend title 17, United States Code, to implement the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty and Performances and Phonograms Treaty, and for other purposes. Public Law 105–304, US Statutes at large 112(1998): 2860.Google Scholar
Electronic Commerce Directive. 2000. Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market. Official Journal of the European Union L/178, 17.07.2000.Google Scholar
Euractiv. 2014. “EU and US mull digital economy chapter in TTIP” Euractiv. (Accessed 8 January 2017) http://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/eu-and-us-mull-digital-economy-chapter-in-ttip/.Google Scholar
European Centre for International Political Economy. 2016. “Digital trade estimates database.” (Accessed 15 December 2016) http://ecipe.org/dte/.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2005. “Communication on E-accessibility”: COM (2005)425 final.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015i. “A digital single market strategy for Europe”: COM (2015)192 final.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015ii. “A reading guide to the EU proposal on services, investment and e-commerce for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.” (Accessed 12 January 2016) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/july/tradoc_153668.pdf.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015iii. “Annexes to the services, investment and e-commerce initial proposal.” (Accessed 12 October 2015) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/july/tradoc_153670.pdf.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015iv. “Initial proposal on trade in services, investment and e-commerce.” (Accessed 12 October 2015) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/july/tradoc_153669.pdf.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015v. “Textual proposal on technical barriers to trade (TBT).” (Accessed October 2015) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/january/tradoc_153025.pdf.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015vi. “Trade in goods and customs duties in TTIP.” (Accessed 12 October 2015) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/january/tradoc_152998.1%20Trade%20in%20goods%20and%20customs%20tariffs.pdf.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2016i. “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market” COM(2016) 593 final.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2016ii. “Implementing decision pursuant to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and the Council on the adequacy of the protection provided by the EU – U.S. Privacy shield” Official Journal of the European Union, L207/01.Google Scholar
François, Joseph, Manchin, Miriam, Norberg, Hanna, Pindyuk, Olga, and Tomberger, Patrick. 2013. “Reducing Transatlantic Barriers to Trade and Investment: An Economic Assessment.” Final Project Report. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
Garcia, Maria J. 2014. “Same aims, different approaches? Recent EU and US free trade agreements in Asia.” London University Association for Contemporary European Studies.Google Scholar
GATS. 1994. General agreement on trade in services. (Accessed 7 July 2017) https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/gatsintr_e.htm.Google Scholar
Greenpeace. 2016. “Tactical state of play.” (Accessed 22 April 2016) https://ttip-leaks.org/ttip/.Google Scholar
Husovec, Martin. 2014. “CETA: should Canadian Internet Intermediaries Worry.” Hutko's technology law blog. (Accessed 12 August 2016) http://www.husovec.eu/2014/08/ceta-should-canadian-internet.html.Google Scholar
InfoSoc Directive. 2001. Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. Official Journal of the European Union, L/167, 22.6.2001.Google Scholar
Irion, Kristina, Yakovleva, Svetlana, and Bartl, Marija. 2016. “Trade and privacy: complicated bedfellows? How to achieve data protection-proof trade agreements.” Institute for Information Law Independent Study, commissioned by BEUC, Amsterdam: 1–90.Google Scholar
Knill, Christopher and Holzinger, Katharina. 2005. “Causes and conditions of cross-national Policy convergence.” Journal of European Public Policy 12(5): 775–96.Google Scholar
KOREU. 2011. Free trade agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, Official journal of the European Union, L 127/1.Google Scholar
KORUS. 2011. Free trade agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America, Public Law 112–41, US Statutes at large 125(2011): 428.Google Scholar
Larik, Joris. 2015. “Good global governance through trade: constitutional moorings.” In Global Governance through trade: EU policies and approaches, edited by Wouters, Jan, Marx, Axel, Geraets, Dylan, and Natens, Bregt, Leuven Global Governance series. Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Meinsner, M. Stefan. 1998. “Global Telecommunications Competition a Reality: United States Complies with WTO Pact.” American University International Law Review 13(5): 1,345–81.Google Scholar
Nikolaïdis, Kalypso and Shaffer, Gregory. 2005. “Managed Mutual Recognition Regimes: Governance Without Global Government.” Law and Contemporary Problems 68(3–4): 263–318.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2015. “Digital Economy Outlook.” (Accessed 23 January 2016) http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/42577/3222224/Digital+economy+outlook+2015/dbdec3c6-ca38-432c-82f2-1e330d9d6a24.Google Scholar
Rabu, Gaylor. 2008. “La mondialisation et le droit : éléments macrojuridiques de convergence des régimes juridiques.” Revue internationale de droit économique 22(3): 335–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renda, Andrea and Yoo, Chistopher. 2015. “Telecommunications and Internet Services: the digital side of the TTIP.” CEPS-CTR Policy Paper No.8. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.Google Scholar
TBT. 1994. Agreement on technical barriers to trade. (Accessed 7 July 2017) https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/17-tbt_e.htm.Google Scholar
Telecommunications Act. 1996. An Act to promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies. Public Law 104–104, US Statutes at large 56(1996): 652.Google Scholar
TPP. 2015. Trans Pacific partnership. (Accessed 7 July 2017) https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text.Google Scholar
TRIPS. 1994. Trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights. (Accessed 7 July 2017) https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_01_e.htm.Google Scholar
United Sates Federal Communication Commission. 2015. “Open Internet Order.” FCC 15–24, GN Docket No. 14–28.Google Scholar
United States Trade Representative. 2015i. “The digital dozen.” (Accessed November 18, 2015) https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Digital-2-Dozen-Final.pdf.Google Scholar
United States Trade Representative. 2015ii. “Transatlantic trade and investment partnership.” (Accessed 18 November 2015) https://ustr.gov/ttip.Google Scholar
United States Trade Representative. 2015iii. “Trans-pacific partnership: Ensuring free and open internet.” (Accessed 18 November 2015) https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Ensuring-a-Free-and-Open-Internet-Fact-Sheet.pdf.Google Scholar
Van Eecke, Patrick (ed.). 2016. “Data protection laws of the world.” DLA Piper, 1–507.Google Scholar
Webb, Matthew. 2013. “Differences in Prominent US and EU Treaties Concerning Liability For Service Providers.” (Accessed 7 October 2015) http://infojustice.org/archives/29093.Google Scholar
Wikileaks. 2015. “The Trade in Services Agreement.” (Accessed 28 March 2016) https://wikileaks.org/tisa.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 1998. “Work programme on electronic commerce.” As adopted by the General Council, WT/L/274.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2011. “Communication from the European Union and the United States: contribution to the work program on electronic commerce.” Council for Trade in Services, S/C/W/338.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2015i. “Information Technology Agreement — an explanation.” (Accessed 17 February 2016) https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/inftec_e/itaintro_e.htm.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2015ii. “Ministerial declaration on the expansion of trade in information technology products.” Nairobi, WT/MIN15/ (25).Google Scholar
Sacha, Wunsch-Vincent and Hold, Arno. 2012. “Towards Coherent Rules for Digital Trade: Building on Efforts in Multilateral versus Preferential Trade Negotiations.” In Trade Governance in the Digital Age, edited by Burri, Mira and Cottier, Thomas. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Alasdair. 2015. “The European Union as a Global Regulator? Context and Comparison.” Journal of European Public Policy 22(9): 1,233–52.Google Scholar