Chinese Import Restrictions on Publications and Entertainment Products Found to be WTO Inconsistent
Introduction

Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
Background
On March 20, 2009, the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body adopted the report of the dispute settlement panel in China â Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (China â IPR).[1] The report addressed three claims brought by the United States alleging that certain Chinese measures are inconsistent with the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
I. Introduction
On March 25, 2008, the United States Supreme Court announced its judgment in Hall Street Assocs. v. Mattel, Inc.,[1] a case involving the exclusivity of the grounds for vacating arbitral awards under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). As explained below, the decision holds that the disputing parties may not agree to expand the grounds for vacatur beyond those listed in 9 U.S.C. § 10.