论文部分内容阅读
发展中国家在第三次欧共体香蕉案和美国赌博案中向DSB申请了在知识产权领域实行跨协定报复,这是很有意义的开端。理论上,发展中国家中止知识产权义务进行报复比在货物贸易领域和服务贸易领域实施报复更具优越性。但是,要使它成为发展中国家的合法、有效、可行的报复方式,还必须权衡知识产权的地域性,权利穷竭制度以及发展中国家欠缺技术能力所带来的限制等可能产生的法律问题和经济问题。
It is a very significant start for developing countries to apply to the DSB for cross-agreement retaliation in the field of intellectual property in the Third EC Banana Case and the U.S. Gambling Case. In theory, it is more advantageous for developing countries to retaliate their intellectual property obligations than to retaliate in the area of trade in goods and trade in services. However, to make it a legitimate, effective and viable means of retaliation for developing countries, it is also necessary to weigh the legal issues that may arise such as the territoriality of intellectual property, the system of exhaustion of rights, and the limitations posed by the lack of technological capabilities in developing countries. Economic issues.