在西方反垄断法背景下我国对外贸易的发展启示 中英文翻译.docVIP

THE IMPLICATIONS OF CHINA’S ANTI-MONOPOLY LAW FOR INVESTORS: PROBLEMATIC PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MARY J. HANZLIK Abstract After almost two decades in the drafting stage, China has finally passed its Anti-Monopoly Law. The Law was passed largely to curb monopolistic conduct by both foreign-owned and domestically-owned businesses in China. This new Law has created debate and worry among commentators and analysts. Some of these commentators and analysts foresee China enforcing the law disproportionately against foreign businesses and investors, while allowing state owned enterprises to operate as they will. This Note narrows its focus to the intellectual property provision contained in the Anti-Monopoly Law. Because of China’s history and its problems with enforcement, it is unlikely that the long-awaited Anti-Monopoly Law and its intellectual property provision will have much impact on the world of business. The Law itself not only lacks a method of enforcement, but it also lacks a specific enforcement mechanism or agency. Additionally, China has faced numerous issues when it comes to the enforcement of its own laws, especially those passed to protect intellectual property owners. “Inadequate protection of intellectual property rights in China costs US firms and workers billions of dollars each year.” After thirteen years in draft, China has finally passed its long-awaited Anti-Monopoly Law (“AML” or “the Law”). The Law was passed on August 30, 2007 and came in to effect on August 1, 2008. The AML has taken somewhat of a backseat in comparison to the more heavily publicized news of the importation of defective products from China into the United States, but the savviest of businesspeople and the world of business news have taken notice of the monumental event. International investors and businesses have grown weary of China’s inability to curb monopolies and to protect intellectual property rights. A business may create a product and expect that it will b