本文選題：“特別301條款” + WTO爭端解決機(jī)制　； 參考：《中國政法大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 2009年4月30日,美國貿(mào)易代表辦公室公布了2009年的“特別301報(bào)告”,中國再次被列入“優(yōu)先觀察名單”和“306條款監(jiān)督名單”,中國的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法及TRIPS協(xié)議義務(wù)的履行情況仍是美國優(yōu)先關(guān)注的對象。因此,加強(qiáng)對美國“特別301條款”、WTO及其相關(guān)規(guī)則的研究,找到切實(shí)可行的適合中國實(shí)際的應(yīng)對策略,對維護(hù)我國的國際貿(mào)易權(quán)利和利益具有重要的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。 本文采用理論與案例相結(jié)合、歷史與現(xiàn)實(shí)相結(jié)合的比較分析的研究方法,全方位的分析研究美國貿(mào)易法“特別301條款”。本文共分為四部分。首先對“特別301條款”的基礎(chǔ)“301條款”進(jìn)行了簡要的介紹,接著介紹了“特別301條款”的立法背景,通過與“一般301條款”、“超級301條款”以及“337條款”的對比,分析了其在美國貿(mào)易法上的地位。本文第二部分對“特別301條款”的實(shí)體性內(nèi)容和程序性規(guī)定分別進(jìn)行了細(xì)致的闡述,并分析了“特別301條款”的實(shí)質(zhì),得出“特別301條款”是實(shí)體與程序相結(jié)合、調(diào)查與報(bào)復(fù)相結(jié)合,是多邊體制下的單邊主義,具有強(qiáng)制性立法的特征。本文第三部分以1998年歐共體與美國關(guān)于美國《1974年貿(mào)易法》第301-310節(jié)的爭端案為切入口,對“特別301條款”在WTO多邊體制下的違反性進(jìn)行分析。最后,通過我國現(xiàn)行立法與“特別301條款”的對比,探索我國應(yīng)對“特別301條款”的策略以及我國外貿(mào)立法對其的借鑒。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D971.2

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉鋒;美國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策最新走向及其應(yīng)對[D];北京郵電大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1969733