China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

December 23, 2009 -

While it may never become a true open market for foreign media, China is being forced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) to at least take a small step or two in that direction.

In filing an appeal against a WTO ruling earlier this year, China had claimed that routing foreign media through its own distributors was a requirement in order to protect “public morals.” The WTO did not agree and has denied China’s appeal, reports the Wall Street Journal.

China now has one year to comply with the ruling and to open its country to more films, videogames and music, which could obviously be a financial windfall for Western companies eying global expansion. If China does not comply within the specified timeframe, the U.S. could rain down trade sanctions on China equivalent to revenue lost on media not allowed into the country. Such sanctions could total billions of dollars.

U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk stated:

U.S. companies and workers are at the cutting edge of these industries, and they deserve a full chance to compete under agreed WTO rules. We expect China to respond promptly to these findings and bring its measures into compliance.

China’s Yao Jian, a spokesman for the Ministry of Commerce, responded:

China has conscientiously carried out its obligations under WTO rules in terms of access to the publishing market since its entry into the WTO.

China currently allows only 20 foreign films a year to be released within its borders, a number that the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) does not see changing, even in light of the new ruling.

The Journal called the rejection of the appeal, “… one of China’s biggest-ever losses at the WTO.”

Posted in

Comments

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

President Obama has spent more then every other world leader combined, currently China owns the majority of U.S Bonds out there and holds a good deal of U.S debt. If China decides to cash out, it’s over for the United States of America just as the U.S.S.R (Soviet Union) collapsed for over spending.

Then your Liberal savior can finally make his own corrupt like South American Socialist Republic where he is President for life and his word is law.

The United States is not going to start a trade War with China, if it does obviously our Dear Leader is doing it for a reason. You can report me to flag@whitehouse.gov (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/facts-are-stubborn-things/)

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

Only about half of US bonds are held by foreign countries ("Most of the government’s holdings are massive savings accounts for programs like Social Security and Medicare." - MSNBC), of which 22% is held by China (according to the US Treasury, as of Oct 2009), which means they hold about 11% of US bonds, and 11% is not a majority.  Yes, facts are stubborn things.

Besides, China can't "cash out" until the bond matures, like everyone else.  In the mean time, they can only sell the bond to someone else.

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

the chinese people want to be free FREE they have life size statue of optimus prime THATS PROOF ENOUGH RIGHT

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

Ah, China; the communists who aren't communists.

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." -Albert Einstein

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

Actually China is the only communist country with any real powers left. Vietnam and North Korea are only surviving as communist countries thanks to China's support, and Cuba is all on it own.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

China: The totalitarianism of Stalin-style communism now featuring the corruption of capitalism!  

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

*smears blue paint over his face* *clears throat* *deep breath* FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM ahem Im not even scottish not a great movie but the quote kinda works here haha

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

About time this came back to bite them in the ass.

I wonder if they'll start eyeing Australia next.

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

I wish they would, then I would eventually be able to get all those great Japanese games that hardly ever come out in my own country down under.

Sad thing is, Australia has a healthy reputation of being huge on importing goods that I don't think the WTO would really consider Australia as being a problem.

I think China attracts allot of attention because of how big the country is in it's size of people/population.

Therefore if more people in China are able to buy their products, then it will be a better trade deal.

The moral part of their argument is really weak and if they ever cared about morality, they should look at themselves and how their government treats those who fight for human rights.

But there is one thing wrong with the WTO, they think that people in China are better off like the people living in Beijing. They should look at other areas of China and see that in reality most of the people in China are from poor families who are struggling to live and they may not be able to buy the things from other countries if they are going to be out of their price range.

TBoneTony

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

If one of those 20 films was "Transformers 2" I can see exactly where the WTO is coming from.  

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

Frankly I don;t think ANY culture should be polluted by Bays garbage.

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

IIRC those 20 movies are all heavily censored.

Re: China Loses WTO “Morals” Appeal

China currently allows only 20 foreign films a year to be released within its borders

Holy shit, seriously? That's peanuts.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightPapa, Of course thre is. That has now become a permanent part of the EULA boilerplate template.07/29/2015 - 12:56pm
Papa MidnightIn case anyone is interested, there is a clause written into Section 10 of Windows 10's EULA that provides for a Class Action Waiver, and restricts the user to Binding Arbitration.07/29/2015 - 11:15am
TechnogeekNo, that folder is what gets used for the upgrade process. I already had the upgrade go through on my notebook.07/29/2015 - 10:35am
Andrew EisenMatt - And AGAIN, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published? How is it not accountable to its readership (which, AGAIN, is primarily game industry folk, not gamers)?07/29/2015 - 10:10am
james_fudgeThat's the clean install, for anyone asking07/29/2015 - 9:23am
TechnogeekAlso, it's the upgrade that's available for installation now. You might need to forcibly initiate the Windows Update process before it'll start downloading, though. (If there's a C:\$Windows.~BT folder on your computer, then you're in luck.)07/29/2015 - 8:46am
TechnogeekAdmittedly there's more room to push for an advertiser boycott when you get into opinion content versus pure news, but keep in mind that reviews are opinion content as well.07/29/2015 - 8:46am
TechnogeekMatts: There's a difference between "this person regularly says extremely terrible stuff" and "I don't like the phrasing used in this one specific editorial".07/29/2015 - 8:45am
MattsworknameWait, is that for the upgrade or the clean install only? cause I was gonna do the upgrade07/29/2015 - 8:32am
james_fudgehttps://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows1007/29/2015 - 8:30am
PHX Corp@Wilson, I'm still waiting for My upgrade notice aswell07/29/2015 - 7:57am
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician