美国“特别301条款”法律分析

发布时间：2018-06-02 18:23

本文选题：“特别301条款” + WTO争端解决机制　；参考：《中国政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 2009年4月30日,美国贸易代表办公室公布了2009年的“特别301报告”,中国再次被列入“优先观察名单”和“306条款监督名单”,中国的知识产权执法及TRIPS协议义务的履行情况仍是美国优先关注的对象。因此,加强对美国“特别301条款”、WTO及其相关规则的研究,找到切实可行的适合中国实际的应对策略,对维护我国的国际贸易权利和利益具有重要的现实意义。本文采用理论与案例相结合、历史与现实相结合的比较分析的研究方法,全方位的分析研究美国贸易法“特别301条款”。本文共分为四部分。首先对“特别301条款”的基础“301条款”进行了简要的介绍,接着介绍了“特别301条款”的立法背景,通过与“一般301条款”、“超级301条款”以及“337条款”的对比,分析了其在美国贸易法上的地位。本文第二部分对“特别301条款”的实体性内容和程序性规定分别进行了细致的阐述,并分析了“特别301条款”的实质,得出“特别301条款”是实体与程序相结合、调查与报复相结合,是多边体制下的单边主义,具有强制性立法的特征。本文第三部分以1998年欧共体与美国关于美国《1974年贸易法》第301-310节的争端案为切入口,对“特别301条款”在WTO多边体制下的违反性进行分析。最后,通过我国现行立法与“特别301条款”的对比,探索我国应对“特别301条款”的策略以及我国外贸立法对其的借鉴。
[Abstract]:On 30 April 2009, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published the 2009 Special 301 report, and China was again placed on the "priority watch list" and the "306 article monitoring list". China's IPR enforcement and compliance with TRIPS obligations remain a priority for the United States. Therefore, it is of great practical significance to strengthen the research on the "Special 301 Clause" of the United States and its relevant rules, and to find practical and feasible countermeasures suitable for China's actual situation, which is of great practical significance for safeguarding our country's international trade rights and interests. This article adopts the comparative analysis research method which combines theory and case, history and reality, and studies the "special 301 clause" of American trade law. This paper is divided into four parts. First of all, it briefly introduces the foundation of "Special 301", then introduces the legislative background of "Special 301", and compares it with "General 301", "Super 301" and "337". Its position in American trade law is analyzed. In the second part of this paper, the substantive content and procedural provisions of "Special 301 Clause" are elaborated in detail, and the essence of "Special 301 Clause" is analyzed. It is concluded that "Special 301 Clause" is the combination of entity and procedure. The combination of investigation and retaliation is unilateralism under multilateral system and has the characteristics of compulsory legislation. In the third part of this paper, taking the 1998 dispute case between EC and the United States concerning Section 301-310 of the United States Trade Law of 1974 as the entry point, the author analyzes the violation of "Special Section 301" under the multilateral system of WTO. Finally, through the comparison between the current legislation of our country and "Special 301 Clause", this paper explores the strategies of our country to deal with "Special 301 Clause" and the reference of our foreign trade legislation to it.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D971.2

【引证文献】