WTO e-commerce #digitaltrade consolidated draft leaked by @bilaterals_org Some interesting things (1/n)

(2/n) Intermediary liability is included without brackets, normally meaning there is some agreement. The text is based on US proposals but has more extensive caveats and exceptions than existing US trade deals
(3/n) No agreement on cross-border data flows at WTO #digitaltrade consolidated text
(4/n) FWIW The UK's (and US) position on WTO #digitaltrade exceptions to the liberalisation of cross-border data flows vs the EU's. Guess which one is which
(5/n) Financial data may be included in the ban on forced localisation of computing facilities, but with many caveats. US regulators had pushed against this in the past but they seem to be losing the battle. Several alt texts. UK to bring more proposals.
(6/n) India (alt 2) and China (alt 3) pushing back against developed countries + Russia + Brazil efforts (alt 1) to make permanent the current WTO moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions
(7/n) No agreement [brackets] on enhanced online consumer protection over what you see in many deals. WTO #digitaltrade
(8/n) Predictable conflicts @WTO #digitaltrade data protection and privacy: UK pragmatism [alt 1] privacy = trust = business, EU [alt 2] privacy = fundamental right + trust (we ❤️ business too !) and US [alt 3] what privacy? limit restrictions to necessity and risk
(9/n) Worrying to see the footnote of CPTPP, UK and Japan agreements giving corporate self-regulation for privacy equal footing to GDPR brought into the main text without apparent push back from the EU #digitaltrade @wto
(10/10) As expected there is a ban on source code disclosure, but no agreement on whether algorithms should be included and what exceptions to apply. According to @k_irion this may be a moot point https://t.co/a582hsyb3W @wto #digitaltrade
PS: The UK and Japan are proposing the provisions on cryptography in their last deal for @wto #digitaltrade including exceptions for security Nobody understands the implications of this, so pushing it for a global agreement seems a bit premature

More from Business

A solo media founder like Rogan or Mr Beast can make as much money as a strong tech founder, with significantly less managerial stress.

Tech created this ecosystem but there’s a historical cultural bias in tech towards media as unprofitable. That changed a long time ago.

Many more angels that invest in people will invest in media founders. Many traditional media people will *become* media founders.

But not necessarily big companies. Just solo individuals or small groups doing content, like Notch doing Minecraft. Because media scales like code.

Increasingly feeling like “keeping the team size as small as possible, even to one person” is the unarticulated key to making media profitable.

Substack and all the creator tools are just the start of this ecosystem.


The process of converting social influencers into media founders (a trend that has been going on for 10+ years at this point) will be increasingly streamlined.

V1 is link-in-bio, Substack, and sponcon.

V2 likely involves more angels & tokenization a la @tryrollhq. What else?

Why lack of awareness? Influencer monetization numbers are not as public as tech numbers.

There isn’t a TechCrunch & CrunchBase for media founders, chronicling the valuations of influencers.

But that’d be quite valuable. If you are interested in doing this, please DM with demo.

You May Also Like