国际贸易法视域下数字贸易的归类

The Classification of Digital Trade in the Context of International Trade Law

数字贸易可大致分为数字产品贸易和数字服务贸易。在国际贸易法视域下,数字贸易的归类直接影响数字贸易的规则适用,但WTO的现有归类系统未能适应数字贸易的特点。数字贸易的归类难题突出地体现在服务贸易模式的认定、电子传输的数字产品的归类以及数字服务贸易的归类中。为保证GATS规则适用的可预见性,将数字服务贸易归为模式一是较为恰当的选择。由于GATS承认发展中国家发展的"不平衡",考虑到WTO的基本目标,数字产品应被定性为服务。对于数字产品的归类,美式FTA采取了灵活务实的态度,避免了将其定性为货物或服务,从而可以在GATT1994和GATS之间选择。WTO争端解决机构依据技术中立原则,将在线交付的传统服务归入传统服务的部门中。各国在谈判数字服务的市场开放问题时应谨慎对待技术中立原则。WTO成员应对既有的归类系统进行更新谈判,以降低数字贸易归类问题的不确定性。对新型数字服务的市场开放作出特殊承诺是回应新型数字服务贸易归类难题的现实选择。

Digital trade can be basically divided into trade in digital products and trade in digital services. In the context of international trade law, the classification of digital trade directly affects the application of digital trade rules, but the existing classification system of the WTO has not been adapted to the characteristics of digital trade. The difficulty in classifying digital trade lies in the identification of service trade model, the classification of digital products transmitted electronically, and the classification of digital service trade. In order to ensure the predictability of GATS rules, it is appropriate to classify trade in digital services as Mode One. Considering the basic objectives of the WTO, digital products should be characterized as services, as GATS acknowledges the "imbalance" in the development of developing countries. Regarding the classification of digital products, the American FTAs adopt a flexible and pragmatic attitude, and avoid defining such products as goods or services, so that they can choose between GATT1994 and GATS. The WTO dispute settlement body has classified traditional services delivered online into the traditional services sector in accordance with the principle of technological neutrality. Countries should be cautious about the principle of technological neutrality when negotiating market opening for digital services. WTO members should negotiate about updating the existing classification system to reduce the uncertainties in the classification of digital trade. Making a special commitment to market opening for new digital services is a realistic choice when responding to the difficulty of classifying new digital services.