本文選題：337條款 + 中國��； 參考：《東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：美國337條款是美國《1930年關(guān)稅法》最有名的第337節(jié)的簡稱。此條款制定的最初目的是為了打擊美國進(jìn)口貿(mào)易中存在的不公平競爭行為,但隨著337條款在實(shí)際中的應(yīng)用,其逐漸演變成為強(qiáng)調(diào)對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)進(jìn)行保護(hù)的條款,并且成為美國企業(yè)打擊國際競爭對手的一件有力武器。中國在近幾年已然成為美國337調(diào)查最主要的打擊對象。在337條款的發(fā)展過程中,其與WTO規(guī)則的一致性一直受到各界的質(zhì)疑。各界學(xué)者劃分為兩大陣營,一方認(rèn)為337條款并沒有違反WTO規(guī)則,另一方認(rèn)為337條款與WTO規(guī)則是沖突的,最起碼違反了其國民待遇原則。筆者在此希望通過分析表達(dá)自己的一些觀點(diǎn),同時(shí)對中國企業(yè)今后在國際貿(mào)易中應(yīng)對337調(diào)查方面提供一些啟示。 本文除導(dǎo)論和結(jié)語部分外共分為四個(gè)部分： 導(dǎo)論部分簡要說明了337條款在美國保護(hù)國內(nèi)知識產(chǎn)權(quán)方面扮演的重要角色以及其應(yīng)用和打擊的廣泛性。并且提出了目前國際社會對337條款在WTO下的合法性具有一定的爭議強(qiáng)調(diào)了分析337條款及其合法性是具有一定的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義的。 第一部分從337條款的產(chǎn)生演變過程及其特點(diǎn)對337條款進(jìn)行了概述,并強(qiáng)調(diào)了由于其在美國保護(hù)國內(nèi)知識產(chǎn)權(quán)上占據(jù)的重要作用以及我國逐漸成為其最大的受害國從而對其合法性進(jìn)行分析是很有必要的。 第二部分是整篇文章的主要部分之一,通過分析歷史上涉及337條款的兩大案件——1983年進(jìn)口某些汽車彈簧零件案和1930年關(guān)稅法第337節(jié)案,引出后文對337條款與GATT第3條第4款以及其與GATT第20條的關(guān)系分析。在1930年關(guān)稅法第337節(jié)案中,專家組提出若干337條款與GATT規(guī)則不相符的意見,隨后在1944年《烏拉圭回合協(xié)議法案》中,美國對337條款進(jìn)行了修改,使337條款符合專家組報(bào)告的內(nèi)容。但這一修改并沒有從根本上消除進(jìn)口貨物與在美國國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)的貨物在知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)方面的差別。隨后圍繞調(diào)查程序中的調(diào)查期限、反訴、排除禁口令、選擇法院以及雙重訴訟與重新訴訟等方面對337條款與WTO規(guī)則的一致性進(jìn)行了分析。 第三部分同樣是整篇文章的主要部分。主要對337條款與TRIPs協(xié)議的一致性進(jìn)行了分析。TRIPs協(xié)議第41條第2款的規(guī)定具有一定彈性因此難以判定337條款是否與之相符,除此之外337條款與TRIPs協(xié)議其它條款即第3條、第50條、第51條、第52條在總體上是相符的。但這一結(jié)論僅僅是從二者在條文字面上的意思來進(jìn)行分析得出的,并沒有深入到法律條款背后多蘊(yùn)含的理念,也并沒有從條款的應(yīng)用會帶來的實(shí)際后果來分析,因此難以保證由此而得出的結(jié)論是正確的。若要得出相對準(zhǔn)確的結(jié)論需要從更多方面進(jìn)行分析,如法律條款產(chǎn)生的淵源、條款修改的過程以及歷史背景等,只有這樣進(jìn)行更加全面的分析才能得出一個(gè)客觀正確的結(jié)論。 第四部分從推翻337條款合法性難點(diǎn)出發(fā)從政府和企業(yè)兩個(gè)發(fā)面分析了我國應(yīng)對337條款的對策。其中消極應(yīng)訴是我國企業(yè)在面對337調(diào)查時(shí)普遍存在的問題,這一問題有其存在的客觀原因如應(yīng)訴成本過高以及時(shí)間限制從而導(dǎo)致無法為應(yīng)訴做準(zhǔn)備等,但更多的是我國企業(yè)本身認(rèn)識的原因。我國企業(yè)普遍對337條款認(rèn)識存在不足,當(dāng)面臨337訴訟時(shí)往往不知所措,無從應(yīng)對。因此提高企業(yè)對337條款的理解同時(shí)在政府的幫助下完善行業(yè)協(xié)會是應(yīng)對337訴訟的有效措施。
[Abstract]:Article 337 of the United States is the abbreviation of the most famous article 337 of the U.S . Customs Law , 1930 . The original purpose of this clause is to crack down unfair competition in the U.S . import trade , but with the application of 337 clauses in practice , it has become a powerful weapon to emphasize the protection of intellectual property rights . In the course of the development of the 337 articles , China has become the most important target of U.S . enterprises to fight international rivals . In the course of the development of the 337 articles , the other party argues that the 337 articles are in conflict with the WTO rules and at least violate the principle of national treatment . The author hopes to provide some inspiration for the future research of Chinese enterprises in international trade in the future .

This paper is divided into four parts except the introduction and the conclusion part :

The introductory part briefly describes the important role played by 337 clauses in the protection of domestic intellectual property rights in the United States and the extensiveness of its application and strike .

The first part provides an overview of the 337 articles from the process of the evolution of the 337 articles and their characteristics , and highlights the importance of its important role in the protection of intellectual property rights in the United States and the fact that our country has become the largest injured State , so that it is necessary to analyze its legitimacy .

The second part is one of the main parts of the whole article . By analyzing the two major cases involving 337 clauses in the history and Section 337 of the 1930 Customs Law , the Group makes a few 337 articles and Article 337 of the 1930 Customs Law . In the section 337 of the 1930 Customs Law , the Group made a number of 337 articles which are inconsistent with the GATT rules . However , the amendment does not fundamentally eliminate the differences in the protection of intellectual property rights of imported goods and goods produced in the United States .

The third part is also the main part of the whole article . The article analyses the consistency of the 337 clauses and TRIPs agreement . In addition , it is difficult to determine whether the clause 337 is in conformity with the provisions of Article 41 , paragraph 2 , of TRIPs Agreement . However , the conclusion is correct . In order to get a relatively accurate conclusion , it is necessary to analyze from more aspects , such as the origin of the legal provisions , the process of the modification of the terms and the historical background , so that a more comprehensive analysis can be made to arrive at an objective and correct conclusion .

The fourth part analyzes the countermeasures of the 337 clauses from both the government and the enterprise in the face of the difficulties of the legality of the 337 clause .
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D971.2;DD912.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張鵬;y囅，

本文編號：1995417