USTR Ambassador “Offended” By TPP Transparency Concerns
3 Comments
Recent Posts
Why the Answers to Hateful Content Online are Hiding in the Platforms’ Own Rules 
From CCH to ChatGPT: How Canadian Copyright Law Played the Key Role in Deciding a Leading AI Training Data Case in India 
Starting Over: Court Filing Confirms the CRTC’s Streamer Contribution Decisions Are Dead With a Full Online Streaming Act Reset to Come 
The Name on the Window Was Enough: The Attacks on Kiva’s and the Normalization of Antisemitic Violence in Canada 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada’s Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
It’s perfectly transparent, if your one of the people they decide to be transparent with. Otherwise, it’s none of your business so why should you care? Go away, you’re just trying to make the country less secure.
All respect to Mr. Kirk’s office…
…but his assessment of the situation is, I strongly suspect, in error. Grievous error.
That sounds like a “term of art”
When diplomats fence, they do so politely: can anyone put this exceedingly odd response into context?
I could interpret it as “you’re a liar, pants on fire”, or as “I have no reply, I’ll pretend to be insulted”.
Anyone speak ambasadorese?
–dave