[Gusfoo_2]

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

[mrspeaker]

What's the difference between secret and confidential (honest question!)?

[sp332]

Confidential negotiations are good for the negotiators, because they can make bluffs and propose compromises without the public breathing down their necks, or second guessing every move. As long as the final text is public before it's put to Congress, I'm fine with that in general.

My problem with the TPP is that it pretends to be a trade agreement but is really targeted at expanding intellectual property laws. The nature of what's being negotiated is being hidden behind the excuse of confidentiality.

[snowwrestler]

Secret: substance and existence is not intended to ever be disclosed. For example, PRISM, MUSCULAR, and other NSA progams revealed by Snowden.

Confidential: existence is well known, substance not disclosed.

In the case of the TPP, the existence is actually strongly publicized by the negotiators, and only the negotiations are confidential--the final text will be made public and debated in Congress.

What is happening right now is that groups that dislike the IP provisions of the TPP are attacking the process for the whole TPP--which is the standard process for any international agreement.

They are taking advantage of the fact that most people don't know, or don't think about, how these deals are always done. So they are able to scare people by using the word "secret".

I don't disagree that the IP stuff bears very close watching, and could be damaging. I just don't think it's a good idea to be so manipulative along the way.

[Tarang]

There's a section on it on wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOFORN#Levels_of_classificatio...

Basically to do with the harm it can cause if it were known. Secret is rated higher than Confidential because it can cause more of a threat to national security.

[eli]

True, though it would be cool to be able to get input from a wider audience before it's final.

[octo_t]

say perhaps the New York Times?

[Zigurd]

The problem is information asymmetry. But not between the parties negotiating. They all see the working text.

[mtgx]

But should it be? Legislation should be developed in the open. It certainly shouldn't be kept secret from the people until the day it's being voted on.

[acodesmith]

Confidential: intended to be kept secret.

We shouldn't split hairs to justify the lack of transparency, especially for such a wide-reaching agreement.

[sdoering]

Non the less. It might be, despite the gonzo title, quite interesting for some people, to see, what the positions of different countries are.

And what comes of it, when it is finalized.