2022年12月，中国将美国对华技术出口管制措施诉诸WTO争端解决机制，控诉其自2022年10月发布的半导体新规中，针对中国所做的一系列《出口管理条例》增改违反了美国在WTO框架下的多项国际义务。而需要看到的是，美国此次颁布的半导体新规不仅对中国半导体产业发展造成了严重负面影响，也将对知识产权制度的正常运行造成极大冲击。而中方的控诉中对知识产权相关的诉求仅限于TRIPs协议第28条，因而本文聚焦于半导体技术而非产品本身，针对美国对华技术出口管制措施在TRIPs协议下的合法性进行分析，也对该案走向进行一定的预测。为了达成上述研究目的，本文采取了案例分析法和规范分析法，在深入分析美国出口管制法律和实践案例的基础上，对美国对华技术出口管制措施在国际法层面的合法性进行了研究，得出结论认为美国新增的半导体技术出口管制措施违反其负有的国民待遇义务、最惠国待遇义务和在TRIPs协议第28条、第9条和第10条项下的国际义务，且无法通过TRIPs协议第73条所规定的安全例外条款得到正当化。
In December 2022, China appealed to the WTO against the US export control measures on semiconductor technology to China, claiming that a series of amendments made by China to its Export Regulations in the new semiconductor regulations issued in October 2022 violated a number of international obligations of the US under the WTO framework. What needs to be noticed is that the new semiconductor regulations promulgated by the US not only have a serious negative impact on the development of China‘s semiconductor industry, but also will have a great impact on the normal operation of the intellectual property system. In China‘s complaint, the appeal related to intellectual property is limited to Article 28 of the TRIPs Agreement. Therefore, this paper focuses on semiconductor technology rather than the product itself, analyzes the legality of US technology export control measures against China under TRIPs, and predicts the trend of this case to some extent.In order to achieve the above research objectives, this paper adopts the case analysis method and the normative analysis method, and studies the legality of the US semiconductor technology export control measures against China in the international law on the basis of in-depth analysis of the US export control laws and practical cases. It is concluded that the new semiconductor technology export control measures of the United States will violate national treatment principle, most-favored-nation treatment principle and its international obligations under Article 28, 9 and 10 of TRIPs, and cannot be justified by the security exception of Article 73.
