International Business Daily special correspondent Ji Wenhua
This meeting of representatives of the United States, when asked, knowing the meeting room, burst into laughter.
WTO meetings are often the old tune, nothing new. If any country's diplomats to open on a harmless joke, often lively atmosphere make up the venue. Today's meeting of China and the United States, and even the WTO, it is unusual for several members of .100 in static air your breath waiting for the decision of their two governments - whether accept the expert on Sino-US intellectual property dispute case report of your findings, or would appeal?
two decades, scores
2007 年 4 10 May, the domestic industry and the urging of Congress, the U.S. has long deterred government, and finally to China shot an arrow on the ride in the bow!
entrenched long-term intellectual property itself, the core issue of Sino-US economic and trade relations, the two countries to stimulate the sensitive political nerve. filled with the problem, the two sides clash has been a long time, several explosive, with several near trade war.
US WTO Dispute Intellectual Property Rights, the two sides of the battle reached a new height and level. with the general WTO trade cases, it both reflects the Sino-US trade ups and downs of the relationship itself, but also inherited the history of Sino-US IPR disputes grievances, while carrying the two different stages of development that occurred because of different demands and concepts of conflict of interest.
is the first Sino-US IPR protection in 1979 January, surface.
1989 年 United States 4 Trade Representative (USTR) blamed China's failure to supply sufficient knowledge products to the United States effective protection will be included in U.S. trade law in China, country ;, and in January 1992 of 1.5 billion Chinese out of retaliation list, the Chinese against each other, issued 1.2 billion U.S. anti-retaliation list, trade war. After arduous negotiations, on January 17, United States signed a memorandum of understanding on the protection of intellectual property rights > In 1994, America has China as a - The number of days after the Feb. 26, the two sides to reach into the 1996 U.S. intellectual property dispute took a dramatic turn, increased bilateral exchanges and dialogue, and present institutional situation. the background is a wide range of China to participate in WTO intellectual property legal system building. but the surface calm, the Sino-US intellectual property rights did not stop the game, not the end of the United States in finding fault with China on intellectual property issues.
2001 年 11 months, China has participated in WTO. the two sides began a short and the publishing market wide open, surrounded by American businessman and into, from extra cash. But soon, things are not as like the United States invented. From the beginning of 2005, China began high-profile rebuke, China as a , China threatened trade retaliation in early .2006, rally public opinion and pressure the United States beginning, as appropriate, will be released in China reported to the WTO, a number of U.S. industry associations have also hear of the sky, some Members of the end of 2006, the U.S. industry, Congress and the Administration on intellectual property issues in the WTO against China reached a WTO lawsuit
played in hundreds of lawsuits in the United States, deployed forces, have come prepared. China will never show weakness, vowed to
2007 年 6 月 7 日, WTO Headquarters, Conference Room D, third floor, the windows temporary Lemon Lake, see Mont Blanc in the large room, filled to capacity. sparkling lake outside the window, sail little bit. room , apparently no such pursuits to watch Zhefan beautiful, but immersed in the language and thought of the battle. more than ten-part by the Chinese delegation at the Ministry of Commerce, Shang Ming led Secretary of Treaty and Law under the case with the U.S. on intellectual property conducted a two-day discussion. Procedurally, if the two sides meet to discuss the results can be achieved, Sino-US disputes enter into the Group will not have to stage the award.
hundreds of questions thrown the United States, China calmly . the United States for a while to Chinese translation, while providing data to the Chinese side, while to the written instructions, but the ultimate one piece of paper did not take away from the Chinese side. The meeting stopped, the warring parties have also representatives of Distance, swept away solemnly, shaking hands unless, Some quite unusual courtesy weekdays meaningful, from the outset, this dispute is not resolved through the discussion of fantasy. a month ago in April 24 to attend the issue to the WTO have expressed strong dissatisfaction, and ringing to say that old man, all of them have not easily bidding. Chairman - Adrian? McKay, thin and brown-haired, New Zealand in the OECD (OECD) negotiations, Ambassador Ambassador harmonious climate change, a senior trade experts; member of the Montgomery Snow? Boer Fazio, intelligent Wakan Te? Di Wali, dark skin, gray hair, the Singapore government officials, APEC (APEC) Intellectual Property Experts Group former Chairman, ASEAN (ASEAN) Working Group on Intellectual Property Chairman, when the soldiers for three years and has served or prepared Captain.
involves three issues important to the U.S. prosecution of the two diametrically opposed attitude:
First: China as a charged core of the problem, purpose at China, Set the safe haven, cases of trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy criminal procedures and penalties for the U.S. would the tasks and achieve the goal of multilateral talks unfinished, ulterior motives. China has the right under WTO rules scale of operation is much higher than the amount of illegal business in China for sure, the extent of the amount of profit, the criminal threshold for the actual situation in China, where appropriate, adequate, not inconsistent with WTO provisions.
intense debate both sides, WTO ruling bodies - - Panel ruled, clearly rejected the United States will Most mind the lack of factual evidence, some of the piecemeal, fragmentary evidence does not prove that the Chinese market any product on the extent of what a commercial scale, the ultimate decision: the United States failed to prove that China violated WTO rules threshold for criminal penalties.
Second, China disposal of infringing goods confiscated by customs the way are in breach of WTO?
provoke the United States on this issue is China's forced to perform when there is a sequence: first, the transfer paid to the social welfare institution or transferred to the power of people; Second, eliminate all the characteristics of infringement after the auction; finally be destroyed. This order can not be directly caused by burning of infringing goods, the Customs, in violation of WTO ; principle. The auction result in the infringing goods flowing into the channels of trade, does not conform to WTO can all be destroyed, not by other means.
this, China one by one to refute. First, the United States intends to fault description of the laws of China, four do not have the forced disposal order, the facts prove the actual situation of China Customs have the right under practical resolution what kind of disposition. Second, WTO does not eliminate the purchase and auction. In addition, Chinese law to ensure that donated goods do not flow into the channels of commerce, avoiding harm to the rights holders; rights holders can decide whether the purchase of the infringing goods will not be against their interests; auction of infringing goods in the condition that eliminate all infringing characteristics channel higher than the WTO rules. only in a subtle, WTO Panel finds that the request did not arrive in China - that China > However, the fact that the United States here, infringing goods are export goods, that is, only 0.15% are imported goods, and dispose of these imported goods, not an application of the auction method. China needs to do, maybe just a little text on the original provisions to do the swap.
Third, China does not protect to stop publishing, dissemination of the work, whether with the WTO agreement?
U.S. blamed China's the spread the work provides automatic protection.
China refuted the United States once again distorted the laws of China. to clarify the initiative of China to foreign works copyright protection does not review the condition of content, some works are not copyright copyright law does not deny, 17 recognizes does not mean not allowed to publish, distribute work, the work has not yet submitted for review and are subject to review work are entitled to copyright protection in China.
on this issue, the Group partially supported by the U.S. plea, determined that publication, circulation work, not protected by this law, limited to the failure of the audit work, by examining some of the works of these two types were removed, dismissed the U.S. coherent point of view. It was also a special emphasis, WTO recognized the right of Governments to the contents of the review.
for this group of experts point support, the United States the amount of the first celebration. However, this is for the U.S. industry did not have much economic value. not just published in China. Moreover, China has the right to expert content review of the support of the United States shook her head incessantly.
a decision on the same
different interpretations of Chinese culture and refined and restrained, which means that China the overall outcome of the case is satisfied.
Panel's decision on the two sides are to receive the resolution, without appeal. especially for the United States, which is obviously a decision to think through repetition.
settled .
then DSB in the March 20 meeting, what to say?
U.S. head start, saying China's ; feel pleased, therefore requested that DSB adopted the report. At the end, did not forget that nagging, cover possession of the evil crime, the candidate of the Department disappointing. forced to admit that will think the United States Yingliaoguansi, at least less negative and more wins.
However, the U.S. Carter, raised placards to speak on behalf of China, so the beginning of the article presents the scene. It aroused great interest of the participants. < br> China noted that the , and never were violated in practice the situation. illegal removal of trademark infringement should not only mark, but in fact China has never had such a way to implement; on the deleted part of the works does not provide copyright protection point of view, but this rule no economic value.
final caution statement on behalf of China, ;.
, thousands of miles away in Beijing, Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesman Yao delivered a written message conversation. domestic media reports and websites to start immediately. less commonly, central station, broadcast in case of questions the way the results sheet, but also turn the broadcast of the WTO dispute settlement of Commerce for the work of Mr Li Chenggang, deputy director of Treaty and Law of the interview.
to Chinese culture and refined and restrained, which means that the outcome of the case in China whole is satisfied. from a professional point of view, in the face veteran rivals, to achieve such success, the exact very easily.
Washington at this time, genius dawn.
3 月 18 日 just get on U.S. trade Representative seat Kirk, adoption of the report coincided with the case, his position can be described as weighing every word, people are not salty not pale. He said: . the case that America will never hesitate to apply various wrist to ensure that industry, the protection of authors and artists, to ensure compliance with WTO promises trade partners, but also with the Chinese side is willing to continue to enhance bilateral dialogue on intellectual property. The position and the report of the Group has just announced two months ago, in stark contrast to the time of .1 26, was cheering on the U.S. rationale USTR's Eergaiye made the interesting facts of the case a little knowledge of the industry are unanimous - the United States lost!
for the expert group's decision, both sides have their own interpretation, rather than consensus.
full of stereotypes may be boring because of the terminology, although large Most of the people, journalists and entrepreneurs are not careful to look closely interlinked and tedious case report. But in the network period, no one is free to flicker, flicker, or the rights of others and possible.
observer. listen to expert opinion may be more objective. very interesting, a little knowledge of the industry comment on the case who unanimously - the United States lost!
Third World Network (TWN), entitled > Canadian law professor, well-known intellectual property experts, Michelle? Gist (Michael Geist) of the article is more blunt, clear title - win badly (lost badly). China does need to amend the China has almost all laws have been recognized. The results of the United States and the fans like Canada is undoubtedly a major failure.
play virtual problem, there is no use. in this case the only major criminal threshold issues, the U.S. lost. This means that the United States Zhulandashui, get the job. A criminal start to understand the threshold can not win, but to flatter the U.S. media publishing industry and respond to congressional pressure, had Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and International Conference Center for continuous development (ICTSD) in Geneva Research, devoted to the case of Sino-US intellectual property enforcement of intellectual property rights award and inspired hundreds of participating experts, academics, government officials agreed that the United States and China in the loser in the very public lawsuit, the win is very limited.
However, the U.S. position is not difficult to understand. Chinese saying goes,
not end in the context of economic globalization, the interests of the extent of how the battlefield there.
taste carefully, you can send Ming Keke's words out of the olive branch - and look forward to quick implementation of China's WTO ruling and actively respond to piracy continuous provocation. secondary. concern, and we therefore WTO against China Election WTO case a dozen years, the U.S. swallow.
China has always been idea to strengthen bilateral exchanges of intellectual property rights, resolve differences through cooperation and exchanges, if the United States through the WTO dispute settlement case really get some good inspiration, not necessarily a good thing.
through this lawsuit, the United States should see, WTO dispute settlement mechanism is not a plaything hands of the Americans, the protection of intellectual property in China's firm determination and positive attitude is not free to kill for. such as the Ministry of Commerce official pointed out, the Chinese side indeed imperative is terms, WTO ruling undoubtedly strengthen the faith and emboldened the Chinese, returned to China a fair. Meanwhile, China has explicitly recognized that in enhancing the protection of domestic and overseas rights in terms of increasing long way to go.
Sino-US intellectual property filled game, far more than the case of specific areas involved, but also beyond the scope of bilateral or WTO, but the degree of developed and developing countries in intellectual property protection and the application of a model of institutional response to conflict. whether it is World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), World Customs Organization (WCO) and other international agencies, or in APEC (APEC) and other multilateral areas, engaged in this conflict all the time. With China's rapid development, this game would be as Shadows, and constantly test the wisdom and the will of the Chinese.
the context of economic globalization, the benefits of how much, how the battlefield there.
easier said network center service mark: trademark registration, trademark transfer, registration of trademarks inquiries, applications for trademark design one-stop service. Tel:
easier said network is a global leader in the online trading platform of intellectual property, intellectual property trading network services, including registered trademarks, patents, skills transfer, copyright, copyright, etc., hundreds of post-doctoral Intellectual Property Rights Experts Group, the intellectual property transactions escort, sincere service, point of knowledge into gold!
related topics article:
Sinoma International Intellectual Property (600 970) the concept of nuclear high base of intellectual property rights and the concept of things
PICC Health
No comments:
Post a Comment