Negotiations began in Melbourne, Australia earlier this month for the eleventh round of the TransPacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP is the latest attempt to integrate world economies and strengthen the regulatory framework of international trade. However, the Intellectual Property community is critical of the process – largely conducted in secret – and the anticipated content of the agreement.

The current round of negotiations may rapidly propel the agreement forward because economic heavyweights such as Japan, Mexico, and Canada may finalize preparations to enter the negotiation process. All three countries announced their interest to join late last year and have been campaigning member countries to accept their bids to enter the negotiation process.

If accepted, the increased prominence provided by these countries will subject the TPP to greater expectations and scrutiny. Supporters of the agreement seek opportunities to reduce trade barriers to increase economic growth for the benefit of member states. Despite the attempts by the participating countries to restrict information about the agreement, two versions of the prospective agreement have been leaked. The leaked versions have provisions that have raised concerns among intellectual property scholars. Critics have vocally denounced the treaty, often linking provisions of the TPP to implement criminal punishments for infringement and increase liability to internet service providers to other controversial bills such as ACTA and SOPA.

There are provisions of the TPP that will increase protections for intellectual property transmitted over the Internet. The trade agreement seeks to increase intellectual property protections beyond current regulations of TRIPS by mandating punishments, increasing financial penalties, threatening punishment to service providers that do not remove offending links, blocking offending websites, and implementing a system of “notice and take-down” to notify users and internet service providers about infringing material.

Although the leaked text of the agreement is ambiguous, the aim is clearly to provide regulations to control online behavior. Critics are concerned that the aims of the agreement could undermine U.S. legal principles, such as fair use and free speech, that protect the public domain. Internationally, critics are afraid that absent the domestic protections of fair use and free speech, member countries could curtail free speech and hinder the creation of democratic societies.

Regardless of the result of the negotiations, two trends are clear: the TPP is the accepted vehicle for harmonizing international law and harmonization includes the regulation of online behavior. At this point, the effect of the Internet on the ways that we in modern society communicate and organize our lives is almost cliché. The effect upon the law has been just as great because the Internet has challenged many traditional concepts of law including jurisdiction, privacy, and intellectual property, just to name a few. The TPP may become the next step to expand international standards of law from commercial transactions to mandating what is recognized as criminal behavior.